CPU
GPU
GeForce GTX 1050 3GB
Popular choices:
GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce GTX 1050 3GB is significantly newer (2018 vs 2011). The GeForce GTX 1050 3GB likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.6% higher G3D Mark score and 33.3% more VRAM (4 GB vs 3 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce GTX 1050 3GB.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 1050 3GB | GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.6%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.6%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2018 / Pascal (2016−2021)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2011 / Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+33.3%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | Standard Size (267mm) |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $30 versus $60 for the GeForce GTX 1050 3GB, it costs 50% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 103.3% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 1050 3GB | GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+103.3%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($60) | ✅More affordable ($30) |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1050 3GB and GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448
GeForce GTX 1050 3GB
The GeForce GTX 1050 3GB is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 21 2018. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1392 MHz to 1518 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5,116 points.
GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448
The GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in November 29 2011. It features the Fermi 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 732 MHz. It has 448 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 210W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5,200 points. Launch price was $289.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce GTX 1050 3GB scores 5,116 and the GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 reaches 5,200 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.6% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 1050 3GB is built on Pascal while the GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 uses Fermi 2.0, both on 14 nm vs 40 nm. Shader units: 768 (GeForce GTX 1050 3GB) vs 448 (GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448). Raw compute: 2.332 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1050 3GB) vs 1.312 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1050 3GB | GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 5,116 | 5,200+2% |
| Architecture | Pascal | Fermi 2.0 |
| Process Node | 14 nm | 40 nm |
| Shading Units | 768+71% | 448 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.332 TFLOPS+78% | 1.312 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 24 | 40+67% |
| TMUs | 48 | 56+17% |
| L1 Cache | 288 KB | 896 KB+211% |
| L2 Cache | 768 KB+20% | 640 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1050 3GB | GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) |
| Frame Generation | FSR 3 (Compatible) | FSR 3 (Compatible) |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce GTX 1050 3GB comes with 3 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 has 4 GB. The GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 offers 33.3% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 84 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1050 3GB) vs 156 GB/s (GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448) — a 85.7% advantage for the GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448. Bus width: 96-bit vs 320-bit. L2 Cache: 768 KB (GeForce GTX 1050 3GB) vs 640 KB (GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448) — the GeForce GTX 1050 3GB has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1050 3GB | GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 3 GB | 4 GB+33% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 84 GB/s | 156 GB/s+86% |
| Bus Width | 96-bit | 320-bit+233% |
| L2 Cache | 768 KB+20% | 640 KB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (12_1) (GeForce GTX 1050 3GB) vs 12 (FL 11_0) (GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448). OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.2. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 3.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1050 3GB | GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 (FL 11_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.6+10% | 4.2 |
| Max Displays | 3 | 3 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 6.0 (GeForce GTX 1050 3GB) vs UVD 4.0 (GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448). Decoder: NVDEC 3.0 vs PureVideo VP4. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1050 3GB) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1050 3GB | GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 6.0 | UVD 4.0 |
| Decoder | NVDEC 3.0 | PureVideo VP4 |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265,VP9 | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 1050 3GB draws 75W versus the GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448's 210W — a 94.7% difference. The GeForce GTX 1050 3GB is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1050 3GB) vs 550W (GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448). Power connectors: None vs 2x 6-pin. Card length: 145mm vs 267mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 65 vs 76°C.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1050 3GB | GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W-64% | 210W |
| Recommended PSU | 300W-45% | 550W |
| Power Connector | None | 2x 6-pin |
| Length | 145mm | 267mm |
| Height | 111mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 2 | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 65-14% | 76°C |
| Perf/Watt | 68.2+175% | 24.8 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 1050 3GB launched at $129 MSRP and currently averages $60, while the GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 launched at $289 and now averages $30. The GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 costs 50% less ($30 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 85.3 (GeForce GTX 1050 3GB) vs 173.3 (GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448) — the GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 offers 103.2% better value. The GeForce GTX 1050 3GB is the newer GPU (2018 vs 2011).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1050 3GB | GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $129-55% | $289 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $60 | $30-50% |
| Performance per Dollar | 85.3 | 173.3+103% |
| Codename | GP107 | GF110 |
| Release | May 21 2018 | November 29 2011 |
| Ranking | #440 | #571 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce GTX 1050 3GB and GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448
